History YMMV / TheLeagueOfExtraordinaryGentlemen

** Hyde's transformed form. There are those who have no problem with it and/or applaud using a bodysuit instead of the limited CGI at the time for it (compare the all-CGI similar depiction of Hyde in ''Film/VanHelsing'' a year later, which has got to be plagiarism or something since the Hulk-sized Hyde only started with Alan Moore). There is also a vocal camp who derides it as a {{Narm}} inducing SpecialEffectsFailure that is ''not'' convincing. At ''all''.

* EnsembleDarkhorse:
** Even though a main criticism of the movie is practically being an InNameOnly, many fans of the graphic novel prefer the film's version of the Invisible Man, [[GentlemanThief Rodney]] [[LovableRogue Skinner]], over his predecessor in the comics; Hawley Griffin was... [[TokenEvilTeammate a rather vile character]].
** ActionGirl vampire Mina.

** Then there's the Golliwog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Kate Upton's source book rather than the more remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character. Which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction, but Moore than proceeded to graft a origin story on him that was practically a slave narrative. Thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out people upset with him as a caricature of a black person, were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.[[note]]To say this character's history is debated is an understatement. Moore according to his interview is clearly of the position that Upton is the full on creator of the Golliwog and the manufacture of toys of him only comes after Upton's books. Others frame that Upton had found a minstrel toy to use as the base for her fictional character without knowing anything more about said toy. See the Headscratchers page if primary sourcing can clarify.[[/note]]

** There's a question of whether Moore's ''really'' TruerToTheText than most other adaptations, or whether he's really just [[DarkerAndEdgier pushing for the darkest possible depictions]] [[AuthorAppeal for his private enjoyment]]. There is a lot of contention that Moore doesn't care about a lot of the characters' textual qualities as long as it fits what he felt the book was about. In the worst cases these can have some of Moore's attempts at SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome, such as Mina's scars, [[FridgeLogic retroactively cause massive plotholes]] if assumed to be true in the source material. The divisiveness isn't helped by the fact that Moore is evidentially easily angered by how adaptations of his work alter his characters, which, given all the examples below, makes this look pretty hypocritical.
*** Particular sore spots include: Mina Murray being a divorced woman when she was HappilyMarried to Jonathan Harker in the original novel, Allan Quatermain becoming far worse of a hero and more of a loser than anything in the actual books, Captain Nemo working for the empire he spent his first book bad mouthing and wanting dead, [[spoiler: Mr. Hyde raping the Invisible Man, James Bond as an incompetent misogynist psychopathic traitor instead of being a loyal, competent ProfessionalKiller, and Harry Potter as a whiny, self-pitying, school-shooting chav strung out on anti-depressants who becomes the Antichrist, which is pretty far off from his actual character]] etc.

** It's true that Allan Quatermain did a drug within the context of his original stories. That was a fictional taduki leaves. Within the purpose of these stories these were specifically used for vision quests and past-life regression. League version of Allan has become and outright opinum addict with Moore seeing such drug use as one of his most important characterizations.

** Series lead Mina Harker is one who attracts a lot of this criticism.
*** There are some implications in [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ this interview]] that Moore saw Mina Harker as a token stock badass female to add to the cast and doesn't understand the themes of ''Literature/{{Dracula}}'' at all. ''Dracula'' is, for all its FairForItsDay issues, about a monster that "can't love" trying to destroy a group of TrueCompanions who are unquestionably loyal and devoted to each other--in particular the uncompromisingly devoted Harker couple, who are utterly in love with and admiring of each other and work hard to be mutually supportive in each's various individual endeavors as well as be strong for each other in all their traumas throughout the novel, both as lovers and as life partners. That Moore's take on a supposed TruerToTheText DeconstructiveParody of ''Dracula'''s characters results in Moore's Mina having such a derogatory attitude towards (and negative history with) Moore's Jonathan shows either that Moore doesn't value the optimistic themes of ''Dracula'' about love and companionship or that he didn't understand them well enough to deconstruct what was actually in the text and, far from making his usage of them TruerToTheText, instead just painted his own AuthorTract over the characters. The only other options are that he didn't actually read the novel or was biased by other adaptations that also drop much of these original themes in favor of adding themes about sexual liberation vs. conformity; Moore seems to understand Mina and Jonathan only as "assertive female with Victorian husband" and made his own assumptions about their characters from that stereotype.
*** In [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ the interview]], Moore seems to have accidentally reinforced the idea that Mina in ''particular'' is a ShallowParody of the character from ''Dracula,'' as he talks about her as if she was a generic female character interchangeable with ''[[Literature/SherlockHolmes Irene Adler,]]'' whose name he can't even remember, and openly says his decision to consider including either character was based on the team needing ''[[TheSmurfettePrinciple "a]]'' woman." Moore claims to have chosen Mina instead of Irene because he thought [[EnsembleDarkHorse Irene Adler]] was ''too obscure,'' but for all the personality traits Moore's Mina has in common with Creator/BramStoker's, some think Moore might as well have picked Irene anyways.
** When it comes to Allan Quartermain in his original form is a GreatWhiteHunter, drug user, and wasn't always a straight and confident hero especially after certain tragic events that shook him. Here in this comic the barely functional on-and-off-the-wagon Quatermain is just as much Moore's invention as everything he accuses Hollywood of doing to soften him and others of his kind up.

*** There were also complaints about Moore's handling of Nemo versus the Edisonaide kids. Nemo does spout racial prejudices as much as them but is still presented very heroic and his termination of being involved with British Empire is a moral choice as detailed above. While the Edisonaide kids are handled with a more outright ammoral slant. Moore has seemingly assumed that Nemo deserved kid gloves treatment because Creator/JulesVerne was giving us an example of DontDoThisCoolThing with Nemo, while the Edisonaide kids were being treated as outright heroes. Which can come off as hypocritical because on their inventions alone many real-life inventors found inspiration in the stories of Captain Nemo and Tom Swift alike, regardless how their narratives positioned them.

** Likewise the boys from Literature/{{Greyfriars}} we see in the League pages are far removed from their heroic sources. Big Brother's government and [[Film/TheThirdMan Harry Lime]]'s M are shown to have way more prejudices than their kid versions. Moore seems to miss the fact that The Famous Five were written as being rather against some thoughts willingly defending minorities, even if some ValuesDissonance went into how they said it. Perhaps most confusingly one of the Famous Five was a minority character himself. While portrayed with broken English, none of the other four ever thought any less of him for it. This character doesn't appear in the League books at all. Some would contend linking Greyfriars to 1984 is appropriate due to Orwell's concern over the popularity of their stories. But even then there seems to be a disconnect as a lot of that concern was over Billy Bunter who was a SpotlightStealingSquad to the Famous Five who was the major attraction to the series for most of the run. Had Moore have made it Billy Bunter who became Big Brother and formed his own inner circle that lead to 1984, a lot more people would have followed along rather than what can't be seen as anything but major changes to Wharton and Cherry.
** Ayesha from ''Literature/{{She}}'' gets her cruelty taken UpToEleven like many characters here but in one way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all.
*** In ''River of Ghosts'' we get several together that make little sense. In Haggard's She books reincarnation is a heavily relied on plot device. Moore chose to connect her supposed reincarnation as actually being connected to the plot of ''Literature/TheBoysFromBrazil'' which was instead about clones. As if this wasn't already a problem Moore connected both of these to ''Literature/TheStepfordWives''. Which is probably even more a confusing fit given in that source it's a major point that Stepford attracts men who have the specific skills they need to create their robots and everyone is directly involved in the process. In League world they seemingly just get their robot wives from this same conspiracy that created clones of Hynkel and Ayesha. Which somehow aren't robots?

** Then there's the Golliwog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Kate Upton's source book rather than the more remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character. Which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction, but Moore than proceeded to graft a origin story on him that was practically a slave narrative. Thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out people upset with him as a caricature of a black person, were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.[[note]]To say this character's history is debated is an understatement. Moore according to his interview is clearly of the position that Upton is the full on creator of the Golliwog and the manufacture of toys of him only comes after Upton's books. Others frame that Upton had found a minstrel toy to use as the base for her fictional character without knowing anything more about said toy.[[/note]]]]
** Moore's attack on [[spoiler: Harry Potter]] hits on a lot of points to look at seperatly.

*** The very basis of Haddo's plan within the League narrative also requires heavily AdaptationDeviation to Harry Potter. What's even more problematic is it requires similar deviation to Aleister Crowley's ''Moonchild''. Moore uses this comic to weld Moonchild to Harry Potter in ways that don't really make any sense in both sources. Given that the Moonchild is supposed to be on purpose conceived in a certain way, which would require his book backstory to all have been an elaborate ruse. Making the wizarding war of Harry Potter's story not real, yet what exactly happened to the magician's war from the plot on ''Moonchild''?

** ''Literature/TomSwift'' is yet another example to appear in both lists because as mentioned in NeverLiveItDown, Moore clearly personified Tom Swift as a greedy American concept to use super cool technology for his own selfish desires. As witnessed in his Dodgem Logic essay he finds as he finds that real life company Axon finding inspiration for the taser from Tom Swift as evidence of this. Critics of this would also point out Tom Swift and the Edisonade genre were inspirational to multiple forms of young inventors and scientists as much as the other science fiction characters and Moore has painted Tom Swift into a corner based on Moore's own opinions rather than anything on a Tom Swift page.

** The argument in ''Century'' that the 21st Century is culturally stagnant or a decline since TheSeventies, ruffled many feathers because it basically comes across as the view of someone writing off the entire millennial generation in comparison to the '60s and the Victorian Era. The criticism of twenty-first century popular culture is undercut by the fact that in setting up [[spoiler:''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] as a strawman villain, the heroes Moore chooses to oppose him [[spoiler:are Mina, Orlando, Alan Quatermain, and Mary Poppins, all from an older era]] rather than say another figure from the contemporary era that Moore might favor. Literary heroes and villains from this period were rather few and far between in the Century volume which by comparison his Victorian era versions were loaded with major players and smaller names for added background.

** In a connection to the example for the comic the film gets this a lot too. The film made a lot of changes to the point of being InNameOnly, this clearly irritated fans who like the comic. But given there is an entry of this trope there too, there were a lot of people who found the comic disappointing (or became disappointing). For this side some of the movie's decisions are called improvements to the comic. Debates about this still spring up to this day on most sites talking about the movie or comics.

** Then there's the Golliwog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Kate Upton's source book rather than the more remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character. Which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction, but Moore than proceeded to graft a origin story on him that was practically a slave narrative. Thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out people upset with him as a caricature of a black person, were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.

** There are some implications in [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ this interview]] that Moore saw Mina Harker as a token stock badass female to add to the cast and doesn't understand the themes of ''Literature/{{Dracula}}'' at all. ''Dracula'' is, for all its FairForItsDay issues, about a monster that "can't love" trying to destroy a group of TrueCompanions who are unquestionably loyal and devoted to each other--in particular the uncompromisingly devoted Harker couple, who are utterly in love with and admiring of each other and work hard to be mutually supportive in each's various individual endeavors as well as be strong for each other in all their traumas throughout the novel, both as lovers and as life partners. That Moore's take on a supposed TruerToTheText DeconstructiveParody of ''Dracula'''s characters results in Moore's Mina having such a derogatory attitude towards (and negative history with) Moore's Jonathan shows either that Moore doesn't value the optimistic themes of ''Dracula'' about love and companionship or that he didn't understand them well enough to deconstruct what was actually in the text and, far from making his usage of them TruerToTheText, instead just painted his own AuthorTract over the characters. The only other options are that he didn't actually read the novel or was biased by other adaptations that also drop much of these original themes in favor of adding themes about sexual liberation vs. conformity; Moore seems to understand Mina and Jonathan only as "assertive female with Victorian husband" and made his own assumptions about their characters from that stereotype.

** It's true that Allan Quatermain is a GreatWhiteHunter, drug user, and wasn't always a straight and confident hero especially after certain tragic events, but the barely functional on-and-off-the-wagon League take on Quatermain is just as much Moore's invention as everything he accuses Hollywood of doing to soften him and others of his kind up.

** Moore's attack on [[spoiler: Harry Potter]] seems to be based on seeing him as representing the summit of modern franchise blockbusters and a stagnant culture that creates nothing new but merely keeps regurgitating and extending stories indefinitely. Many point out that [[spoiler:''Harry Potter'']] is an original creation developed by an individual rather than a huge publishing corporation in the late-nineties, had a set number of installments from the first novel, and was made into a series of films that hadn't been remade or had artificial sequel/prequels attached at the time Moore was writing. Thus, it seems to be stretching things to make him some the embodiment of everything wrong with modern franchise culture. While there are certainly many things that can be criticized about the Harry Potter books, the points Moore attempts to make are not among them.
*** On the more personal level one can make a decent argument there is some textual accuracy to Harry Potter's concern he is just a pawn in someone else's chess game. But Alan Moore chose to make the person setting this up be Voldemort (as possessed by Oliver Haddo). Many have pointed out that Albus Dumbledore would have actually made more sense in this role given that in the source he was TheChessmaster who used Harry Potter as a part of his own grand plan. This is made even worse where Moore made Voldemort a teacher and then head master, which never happened in the books but was true for Dumbledore.

** Ayesha from ''Literature/{{She}}'' gets her cruelty taken UpToEleven like many characters here but in one way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all. Bonus points to tying her "resurrection" into ''Literature/TheBoysFromBrazil'' plot line when her own hooks heavily relied on reincarnation as a plot feature.
*** Notwithstaning Moore's handling of the Flame of Kor, which in the source was a [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin flame]] that you were only allowed to go into once that made you immortal and free of aging of the flesh.
** Did Franchise/JamesBond deserve a long overdue piss-take? Absolutely. Could there be humor in Moore's take? Yes. But does that mean there's nothing compelling about his films or the original book or espionage fiction which Moore sees as possessing disagreeable political subtext. That last part is dubious, especially since Moore's focus on his Bond satire is Fleming!Bond, and Creator/RogerMoore and Creator/DanielCraig. Missing is ''Film/OnHerMajestysSecretService'' which many consider an excellent film, and a very successful and convincing attempt at humanizing Bond. Let alone remembering how Creator/IanFleming's Bond himself grew as the book series continued. There is also the other aesthetic qualities such as the action, gadgets, and set design which Moore mocks as impractical, but which others would see as NarmCharm of the kind Moore celebrates elsewhere and is surely no less practical than the ScienceHero set-up of Captain Nemo and others, which Moore plays straight and seems to romanticize by comparison.

** Then there's the Gollywog. Moore had originally defended his inclusion by stating he was going to pull him from Kate Upton's source book rather than the more remembered UncleTomfoolery minstrel use of the character. Which seemed divisive but somewhat understandable for deconstruction, but Moore than proceeded to graft a origin story on him that was practically a slave narrative. Thus making Moore's original point seem rather shallow in itself. As it turns out people upset with him as a caricature of a black person, were just as upset with Moore's transformation of him into a space version of a black person.

** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' is another on this list who showed off values that at the time of his creation were acceptable, if at the bare edge of that category. This seems to be the only focus of Moore's take on him; [[DumbMuscle a giant, hulking mass of muscle and prejudice]]. Nevermind that Drummond was more stocky and a completely capable detective who was much smarter than people gave him credit for, radical political beliefs notwithstanding.

*** There were also complaints about Moore's handling of Nemo versus the Edisonaide kids. Nemo does spout racial prejudices as much as them but is still presented very heroic and his termination of being involved with British Empire is a moral choice as detailed above. Nemo was handled with kid gloves despite Moore still seeing Creator/JulesVerne giving us an example of DontDoThisCoolThing in that wouldn't it be terrible if this fantastic technology was used by someone like Nemo.

** Likewise the boys from Literature/{{Greyfriars}} we see in the League pages are far removed from their heroic sources. Big Brother's government and [[Film/TheThirdMan Harry Lime]]'s M are shown to have way more prejudices than their kid versions. Moore seems to miss the fact that Literature/TheFamousFive were written as being rather against some thoughts willingly defending minorities, even if some ValuesDissonance went into how they said it. Perhaps most confusingly one of the Famous Five was a minority character himself. While portrayed with broken English, none of the other four ever thought any less of him for it. This character doesn't appear in the League books at all. There is also some contention that it was weird to do "one of the Famous Five is Harry Lime" plot and then have that member be Bob Cherry instead of Harry Wharton who instead became Big Brother. Literature/BillyBunter is perhaps the Greyfriars character who's deconstruction is the most in line with his original writing.

** Ayesha from Literature/{{She}} gets her cruelty taken UpToEleven like many characters here but in one way that outright breaks her characterization. In ''She'' it is her genuine love for Leo Vincey that drives her CharacterDevelopment especially within the sequel. Moore has Ayesha dispose of Vincey without any care at all. Bonus points to tying her "resurrection" into the Literature/TheBoysFromBrazil plot line when her own hooks heavily relied on reincarnation as a plot feature.

** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' in this issue ties into the NeverLiveItDown example above. One major thing the League version of him gets rather confused on lies in the name. Book Drummond is ex military with a six foot frame with a stocky build. Making the Bulldog comparison accurate to both his attitude and look. The version in the League has seemingly picked up a much more exaggerated muscle man look than his original version that wrecks half the original joke. Ironically Drummond had been given AdaptationalAttractiveness in film before to be played by Ronald Colman. Neither Colman or O'Neill's artwork would lead you to read "bulldog" as well as H. C. [=McNeile=]'s writing.

** The argument in Century that the 21st Century is culturally stagnant or a decline since the '70s, ruffled many feathers because it basically comes across as the view of someone writing off the entire millennial generation in comparison to the '60s and the Victorian Era. The criticism of twenty-first century popular culture is undercut by the fact that in setting up [[spoiler:''Franchise/HarryPotter'']] as a strawman villain, the heroes Moore chooses to oppose him [[spoiler:are Mina, Orlando, Alan Quatermain, and Mary Poppins, all from an older era]] rather than say another figure from the contemporary era that Moore might favor. Literary heroes and villains from this period were rather few and far between in the Century volume which by comparison his Victorian era versions were loaded with major players and smaller names for added background.

** The opening scene where a police officer stupidly stands in front of a tank and yells at it to stop several times, only to get run over. He might not know what it is, but most people would know to get out of the way of the huge metal object heading towards them. It's like someone tried to do a serious version of [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4UFQWKjy_I this]] ''Film/AustinPowersInternationManOfMystery'' scene.

* EnsembleDarkhorse: Whenever [[Series/DoctorWho the Doctor]] appears, or is referenced, fans tend to make a big deal of it. This is to be expected, given how he's a classic British pop culture hero no matter how brief his appearances are. Ironically Moore himself isn't a fan of the show, feeling that it peaked during the first run with Hartnell in the '60s.

* WhatAnIdiot: In ''The Tempest'', Emma makes it her mission to assassinate "Jimmy" to avenge her murdered friends. She and Orlando travel to London, where they meet the Moneypennys (daughters or granddaughters of the original Miss Moneypenny, or possibly unrelated with the same code name).\\
'''You'd Expect:''' Since the Moneypennys are [=MI5=] secretaries who regularly have sex with Jimmy in his abode, Emma and Orlando would ask for their help in sneaking into either Jimmy's apartment or the [=MI5=] building and formulating the best assassination plan.\\
'''Instead:''' They convince Jason King to kill Jimmy, without direct help from them or the Moneypennys.
** Then, after several failed assassination attempts, [[WhyDontYouJustShootHim Jason decides to shoot Jimmy in the head.]]\\
'''You'd Expect:''' With all eyes off him, Jason pulls out his gun and shoots Jimmy dead.\\
'''Instead:''' Jason pulls out his gun and shouts, [[TalkingIsAFreeAction "This is for my sister!"]]\\
'''Result:''' Jimmy uses J1 as a human shield, [[AssassinOutclassin and the rest of the J-Series kill Jason]].

'''You'd Expect:''' Since the Moneypennys are MI5 secretaries who regularly have sex with Jimmy in his abode, Emma and Orlando would ask for their help in sneaking into either Jimmy's apartment or the MI5 building and formulating the best assassination plan.\\

** People who disliked [[spoiler: Literature/HarryPotter]] or who liked it but felt it was overrated in esteem and especially found the title character less interesting than the supporting cast enjoyed Moore's takedown of it in Century Vol 3. These fans also point out that Moore's basic satirical message, i.e. a CharacterExaggeration of his IdiotHero tendencies and an attack on the stories overall "trust-fund orphan" narrative of entitled heroism and luck-driven victories is in fact completely accurate and moreover echoed criticisms of the book made by its own fans and [[spoiler:by Severus Snape within the stories. They note that Snape is the only HP character who is treated positively by Moore]].

** ''Literature/BulldogDrummond'' in this issue ties into the NeverLiveItDown example above. One major thing the League version of him gets rather confused on lies in the name. Book Drummond is ex military with a six foot frame with a stocky build. Making the Bulldog comparison accurate to both his attitude and look. The version in the League has seemingly picked up a much more exaggerated muscle man look than his original version that wrecks half the original joke. Ironically Drummond had been given AdaptationalAttractiveness in film before to be played by Ronald Colman. Neither Colman or O'Neill's artwork would lead you to read "bulldog" as well as H. C. McNeile's writing.

** Moore also took Olimpia from Creator/ETAHoffmann's story ''Literature/TheSandman'' and is characterized as something far off from Hoffmann's story. Olimpia in the original story was a barely passable doll. She only could say "Ah Ah" and was destroyed. Moore's version practically makes her a fully functional robot capable of thoughts and living a romantic life with Frankenstein's Monster even helping make other monsters. Moore also tries to rationalize Victor Frankenstein was somehow inspired by Spallanzani's creation of Olimpia, despite there literally being nothing in common between Frankenstein's monsters creation and Olimpia's creation other than making some kind of person.

** There's a question of whether Moore's ''really'' TruerToTheText than most other adaptations, or whether he's really just [[DarkerAndEdgier pushing for the darkest possible depictions]] [[AuthorAppeal for his private enjoyment]]. There is a lot of contention that Moore doesn't care about a lot of the characters textual qualities as long as it fits what he felt the book was about. In the worst cases these can have some of Moore's attempts at SurprisinglyRealisticOutcome, such as Mina's scars, [[FridgeLogic retroactively cause massive plotholes]] if assumed to be true in the source material. The divisiveness isn't helped by the fact that Moore is evidentially easily angered by how adaptations of his work alter his characters, which, given all the examples below, makes this look pretty hypocritical.

** The ''Century'' trilogy is very divisive amongst readers, with some hailing it for its more experimental qualities, well-done characterization, and the many [[SugarWiki/MomentOfAwesome Awesome Moments]] that occur. Others slam due it due to Moore's [[NostalgiaFilter attitude towards virtually all modern culture]], [[NewMediaAreEvil the indulgence in thematic antiquarianism in a series that had once critiqued that kind of thinking]], [[CreatorsPet Orlando, a two-note character who seemingly exists only to provide]] AuthorAppeal and his [[ShallowParody mean-spirited]] treatment of [[Franchise/JamesBond modern]] franchise [[Franchise/HarryPotter characters]].

** Alan Moore always tried to sell the series on the strength of its central MassiveMultiplayerCrossover, with an intricate universe that showed dozens of classic works of literature weaved together into a cohesive whole. In that regard, one element that got some buzz was his use of BroadStrokes to develop once-bland cyphers into interesting characters in their own right. In the first volume, these two elements perfectly complemented and spiced up a genuinely interesting adventure story. However, by the time of ''Black Dossier'' and especially ''Century'', they had become a major weakness. For the former, many scenes ended up being devoted to [[ContinuityPorn showing off Moore's education]] instead of advancing the plot, leaving a whole lot of interesting names scattered through a slow and boring narrative. As the series advanced into modern times, Moore also ran out of {{Public Domain Character}}s, forcing him to do a whole lot of obvious WritingAroundTrademarks. For the latter, Moore attempted to apply his broad-strokes reinvention technique to characters who were far more well-known and fleshed-out to readers than the likes of [[Literature/KingSolomonsMines Allan Quatermain]] (most infamously ''Franchise/JamesBond'' and ''Literature/HarryPotter''), leaving the impression that Moore either [[CriticalResearchFailure hadn't done any research]] or [[Administrivia/ComplainingAboutShowsYouDontLike was trying to fulfill some kind of vendetta.]] Other times, he botched the reinvention; one of his most ambitious creations, Orlando, earned a reputation as a CreatorsPet, and the general opinion of [[{{Blackface}} the Golliwog]] is that he was [[ValuesDissonance best left forgotten.]]

*** And they're all working at the behest of [[ComicBook/NickFury a mysterious government figure]]. The only ones that don't match are [[ComicBook/TheMightyThor Thor]] and ComicBook/{{Hawkeye}} [[note]]unless you include Quatermain, who is a crack shot, or reformed thief Skinner (assuming MCU Hawkeye shares that part of the comic version's past)[[/note]], but other than that, one almost expects Quatermain to yell "[[ComicBook/TheAvengers League, assemble!]]"

** How feminist ''is'' the character of Alan Moore's Mina Murray? [[https://www.cbr.com/alan-moore-interview/ This interview]] shows the thought process behind his decision to include her in his cast and doesn't exactly paint a good picture. Moore says that he wrote Mina into the series because they needed "[[TheSmurfettePrinciple a woman,]]" and [[Literature/SherlockHolmes Irene Adler]] (whose name he apparently can't remember during the interview; he refers to her as "some genius woman in ''Sherlock Holmes''") was "too obscure." He then says that Mina "dropped Jonathan" (whom he calls a [[TheSoCalledCoward "milk sop"]]), became a Suffragette (despite her canonically criticizing the "New Woman" in the novel), had romantic feelings for Dracula (someone whose only direct interaction with her in the book was coded as sexual assault), still feels guilty for Dracula's death, and is "obviously" getting intimately involved with Quartermaine. Defenders say that Moore's Mina is a strong female character and an active and important member of the cast--a veritable badass--while detractors say that the implication that Moore sees Mina being his token badass female character as incompatible with her being a loving wife in a mutually supportive romantic relationship with Jonathan is very uncomfortable, and that Moore revealed his true (distinctly non-feminist) feelings towards the matter in the very fact that he had to {{Retcon}} Mina's and Jonathan's canonically mutually devoted relationship to make Mina into the character he wanted and, further, by the fact that he claims that his version of Mina had romantic feelings for Dracula, her book-canon rapist-coded assaulter who imprisoned and tortured her husband and murdered her best friend, to the point where she regretted helping her husband and their friends kill him (which, in the book, they did mostly to save Mina and she was arguably their leader in this endeavor). All of this is, to use an overused phrase, extremely problematic.

* CluelessAesop:
** In ''Century: 2009'' and ''Tempest'', Creator/AlanMoore critiques twenty-first century popular culture and fiction as being decadent, hollow and inferior when compared to the culture and fiction of previous generations. Which is all very well and good, but many reviewers and critics (such as several members of the discussion [[http://mindlessones.com/2012/06/26/league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen-century-2009-thoughts/ here]]) pointed out that it's pretty clear that Alan Moore also has little to no idea or interest in what's actually going on in 21st-century popular culture and fiction. Moore himself has been vocal about his lack of engagement with a lot of central elements of modern popular culture (such as the Internet and contemporary cinema); accordingly, unlike previous volumes of the series, there are few direct references to contemporary culture and fiction, and many of those that are present are inaccurate, questionable, or still somewhat outdated (as in hailing from or being more relevant to the 1990s or early 2000s than the 2010s). This means that for many readers the work is less of the searing indictment of contemporary fiction and culture it was intended to be, and more of Alan Moore coming off as a bit of a GrumpyOldMan complaining about things he doesn't really understand or care about.
** ''The Tempest'' also features tirades about the modern popularity of superheroes, whom Moore accuses of being a plague on the human psyche, promoting fascism, and at one point even comparing them to the ''Ku Klax Klan'', arguing there's a direct line between the inspiration for a masked alter ego scenes ''Film/BirthOfANation'' and ''{{Franchise/Batman}}''. Worse, this is not only is this irrelevant to the main plot of the comic, but [[ShowDontTell superheroes are never actually shown being a detriment of any sort to human society]]. The superheroes who happen to be supporting characters use use their abilities to help the heroes [[spoiler: abandon Earth during the apocalypse and make all their new allies immortal]], and no ethical complaints of any sort are made.

* EnsembleDarkhorse: Whenever [[Series/DoctorWho the Doctor]] appears, or is referenced, fans tend to make a big deal of it. This is to be expected, given how he's a classic British pop culture hero no matter how brief his appearances are.

** Tom Sawyers inclusion through ExecutiveMeddling is either seen as a refreshing addition to the cast who appeals to the younger generation or a thinly-disguised marketing ploy shoehorned in to get more Americans to see the movie.

* CriticalDissonance: There are fans who are genuinely confused by the movie's poor reception and love the action scenes and performances. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has a 44% audience score which, while still on the lower side, is still noticeably better than the 17% critics score.

** The opening scene where a police officer stupidly stands in front of a tank and yells at it to stop several times, only to get run over. He might not know what it is, but most people would know to get out of the way of the huge metal object heading towards them. It's like someone tried to do a serious version of [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4UFQWKjy_I this]] ''Film/AustinPowers'' scene.

** When he's captured in Paris, Hyde is wearing a torn suit and shirt (with the standard MagicPants)... and a fully intact ''giant top hat''. Sawyer then channels the audience by picking up the hat while making a face that just screams, "Where the hell did he ''get'' this?"

* NightmareRetardant: The BigBad loses all intimidation when he starts taunting Quatermain in the cemetery. Why? Because the whole time he's running around desperately trying to get out like a frightened child.

[[/folder]]